Iran’s Regime Reveals Its Brutality

Posted on Jun 23, 2009

The truly significant result of the suppressed Iranian revolt is that the most important Islamist radical movement in the contemporary world has demonstrated that it has become a brutally repressive dictatorship whose leaders rig elections and beat down clear popular demands for a true election count or repeat of the election itself.

This affair has nothing to do with the alleged war of civilizations or the machinations of the American Great Satan, or of the hereditary enemy of Iran, the British Empire. It is the consequence of the abuse of power by leaders who established a new form of religious republic, meant to combine what they believe to be God’s law, as set forth in the Quran, with the exigencies of modern politics and power, among them nuclear power, leading toward nuclear weapons to deter enemy Israel and infidel America.

Iran has made itself the leading Islamic state in the Middle East, a republic standing alongside the traditional Muslim monarchies of Jordan, Morocco and Saudi Arabia. It was meant as a model of Muslim self-liberation from foreign oppressors.

It had been an exemplar in both 1951 and 1979 of popular uprising against Western domination, and subsequently of the installation of a modern Islamic form of government with a democratic substructure, controlled within clerical institutions, with a clerical supreme leader who spoke the divinely inspired final word on government decisions.

This government now stands discredited internationally, as well as in the eyes of what clearly seems the majority of Iranians, who are ruled today by a massive deployment of police power for the sake of unaccountable personal or clan advantage of the leadership. They, and Muslims in general, should learn from this that the enemies are not all without—they are also within the Islamic world.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

The Iranians have been revolutionaries twice in modern times, both times eventually submitting to foreign power. This time it is Iranian and Islamic power that abuses them, not foreign oppressors. Could they successfully revolt once more, against domestic tyranny? Or does the revolt still go on?

The first rebellion followed World War II occupation by Britain and the Soviet Union, followed by an attempt by the USSR to set up a Soviet-controlled splinter state in the north. However, Iran’s constitutional movement goes back to the start of the 20th century, and the Shah of Iran at that time accepted a constitution and parliament in 1906. However, the country was divided into czarist and British spheres of influence, and the United States took over from both after the Second World War.

In 1945, the national movement was led by a veteran prewar parliamentarian, Muhammad Mossadegh, who demanded nationalization of the British-owned Anglo-Iranian Oil Co.

When parliament voted the nationalization, the shah was compelled to name Mossadegh prime minister. But Mossadegh’s resistance to the terms demanded by Britain led to a political crisis in which the shah fled the country—to be brought back and reinstated by the CIA.

Mossadegh was sent to prison for three years of solitary confinement, and then held in house arrest for the remainder of his life.

The shah encountered the second rebellion 28 years later, the CIA being unable to save him a second time. The successful Islamic revolt of 1979 installed the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, and the revolutionaries sacked the U.S. Embassy to boot, successfully holding its members ransom for more than a year.

(Why this was allowed to happen remains a mystery. Instead of recognizing the seizure of the embassy as an implicit act of war, and detaining Iranian officials, businessmen and students in the United States for exchange under the auspices of the Red Cross, the Carter administration frantically forced all the Iranians in the country to leave the U.S. as fast as possible. The American Embassy staff then endured 444 days’ imprisonment, and an ill-conceived military rescue fiasco, before the Iranians triumphantly handed them over to Ronald Reagan.)

The admirable Lebanese editor and commentator Rami G. Khouri has just written that ordinary Arabs elsewhere, living under autocratic and potentially vulnerable leaders of their own, have watched this Iranian uprising with “forlorn envy.”

Why forlorn? What stops them from their own revolts, if that is what they want? The Pakistan tribesmen of the Swat Valley, and elsewhere in the country’s northwest territories, are even now fighting to expel Taliban intruders.

The Iranian revolt may not be over. But even if it is, Iranians will one day surely try again. The Iraqis, whose nation seems approaching another sectarian or ethnic precipice, could, if they had wanted, have saved themselves much bloodshed and misery by rebelling against Saddam Hussein themselves, as they had done against previous unwanted rulers. People must make their own decisions. If not, they risk getting the governments, or the liberators, they deserve.

KDelphi, you are right and I apologize. However, I did not accuse you of anything and I took excessive exception. There had been no direct or even an indirect remark that involved you in my opinion of Mexico, Cuba, Venezuela, and I said nothing about present day politics in Bolivia.

Just to clear the air…you said, She, I did not “attack ” you?! Please, show me where I did. Please do not confuse my disagreeing with you with an “attack”. June 26 5:03pm. So please KDelphi show me exactly where I accused you.

From our posts we have different views on Chavez, but I didn’t ‘attack’ you about it. I expressed an opinion about Chavez.

Again KDelphi: She—Winning by more than 50% is hardly something that USAns have a right to criticize. If you have some inside knowledge as to your question “how much of it was coerced”, tell Obama—maybe he’ll want to invade. Now that is a silly thing to say. I am the one remarking on the almost equal percentage of the vote, not the entire USA! And I am asking an obviously rhetorical question about possible voting coercion, and to ask if I have ‘inside’ knowledge is inane.

We disagree about Cuba and Castro. That is okay. People do not have to agree. I gave my reasons, you gave yours. Very civilized. But then you assumed out loud (it’s called a passive criticism) that I had an opinion about Morales when I said nothing about the present Bolivian politics. What gives there?[/] I did refer to the historic Simon Bolivar who wanted to be a permanent ruler of Bolivia as a comparison to Chavez’s desire.

Then again, KDelphi, June 28 at 2:10 pm She—I didn’t say that I agreed with the Bolivarian article. I was merely presenting evidence that dissent does go on in Vemezuela and YOU were the one who brought up Chavez in the first place.[/] I have already addressed this defensive post of yours that someone else brought Chavez up as a subject, but once again…I never said you did agree with the article, nor implied you did. If you think I did, please show me where that happened. If you want to keep this trite personal interaction going, okay, but far as I’m concerned this line of talk is over.

In a different direction, in your post of June 28 2:10pm you noted, Foreign Money Seeks to Buy Lebanese Votes. Is there anyone who doubts that happened? Foreign money includes money from Iran to Hezbollah. So it gets to be moot that countries are supported financially by partisans of other countries. It happens all the time and shouldn’t be surprising or unexpected anymore.

Again I apologize for my imprudent remark to you KDelphi June 28, 7:29pm. I assure you it will not happen again.

She—I actually respect most of your opinions, even though I disagree with many of them. But there is one thing that you do that really bothers me…stuff like this.

“You must have some kind of persecution complex”—why do you have to put it that way.
I got it wrong, then, ok?

You disparaged the Bolivarian stuff, so I assumed that you were doing that in response to some idea that I supported them—I didnt say that I did or didnt. I do not know enough about them to really form an opinion.

How does that make me have a “persecution complex”???

Surely you know that any statement that starts with “You must..” will be seen as an attack.It certainly is not very persuasive when it comes to point of view…

Unfortunately, ITW, you are correct. Perhaps with a half black president, Jackson State species of violence will get different press, but with all my heart I hope it never happens again to test the hypothesis. Of course, the Supreme Court decision 5 to 4 about the discrimination case against the firefighters employment test does not show much in the way of progress.

skeptic – you are tiresome. To try to support your own weak argument you offer a mixed fruit bowl of premises that do not compute with peaceful demonstration and protest. Why would you say I must be kidding? That is a rather banal statement and lack of understanding what is actually being talked about. It appears that you have a problem in that you cannot fathom that other people who disagree with you might just be sincere! I could ask you the same stupid question. Are you kidding? Do you have any powers of discrimination? Meaning, ability to see differences? Why would lynchings and other kinds of murder be counted in the discussion being had at the moment. Clearly there is no comparison with that kind of violence against single individuals due to the insanity of racism and the kind of violence due to the oppression of a country’s own people who protests their government’s beliefs and practices by coming out into the street in the hundreds of thousands. Of course the MLK, and JFK, and don’t forget Medgar Evers or Malcolm X murders are travesties and a blight on humanity. All of these are the result of one or two insane minds, and also let’s not forget Harvey Milk, and Dr. George Tiller. Nevertheless those killings are not like what the peaceful demonstrators in Iran suffered. Yes death is involved, but we are not here arguing that people died, but why and how they died. Excuse me which of the American leaders were murdered by civilian militias? What exactly is a civilian militia by the way? You are so much like the others of the Contingent. Accuse without giving much in the way of substantiation.

Two factors must be added:
1) The “Authorities” had already shown they were willing to shoot peaceful college students. At Jackson State they were VERY aware, of course, of the shootings at Kent State. Virtually every American was.

2) There’s a black and white difference between the shootings at Kent State and Jackson State. Literally. The KS victims were White, and the JS victims were Black, in the DEEP South, just 5 years after the Voting Rights Act. Naturally, somehow the police came up with all kinds of reports of how the “nigra” students were “naturally” violent.

Sadly, it worked and White America wasn’t nearly as shocked and outraged about Jackson State as it was and REMAINS about Kent State…
“Tin soldiers and Nixon coming. We’re finally on our own.
Last summer I heard the drumming: Four dead in O-Hi-o”

Yes, ITW, ashamedly I did forget about Jackson State. How easy is the tendency to put ugliness out of the mind. But with your reminder I do remember it. Thank you. In that confrontation, the students were not protesting peacefully. They had started fires and were damaging property, cars, etc. It was criminal in part. So when the fire department and police were called in. After the fires were put out disbursment of the crowd by the police ensued. The police opened fire claiming that snipers were at work. Students argued there was no such provocation. There was no resolution to the entire event. Is there ever a reason for authorities to control a situation with violence where the participants are engaging in damage to property?

The emotion of the time, with the Kent State killings and injurying nine other students, one permanently paralyzed, fresh in the mind, does offer some mitigation. But one cannot reasonably blame emotion, can one? The case of Kent State was brought to its dramatic point when people, students presumably, engaged in mayhem throwing beer bottles at cars and breaking the windows of stores, one of which was a bank window that set off the alarm, which is what called the authorities to the scene. Other people, not known if they were students, started vandalizing and looting. This was the climate of that protest. While it may have started out to be, it was not a peaceful demonstration. The students had no real leader, it turned into chaotic. Nowhere were the spirits of Ghandi or Martin Luther King, Jr., or a Mandela around. The students were afraid of being drafted to go to a war they were vehemently against. I was not of voting age yet and so while I was intuitive against the war, I didn’t have any solid opinion about it. I hadn’t even yet begun to consider the morals of mankind. But I have given a huge amount of thought since!

The protesters in Iran were different. There was only peaceful marching and the government authorities ordered violence done to them, and they had a focalpoint in Mousavi’s defiance. That gave them the courage to challenge the IRI government. Shocking the government, the peaceful protesters were clever enough to show the world what was going on. There is a claim that violence was committed by the protesters but there is not one shred of evidence for that claim.

Shields says, It’s also particularly interesting that no one speaks of the hundreds of thousands coming out for the regime… Wouldn’t it be expected that there would be supporters of The Regime? Why would that be surprising or worth any mention? What is surprising are the 13 and a half million who protested against the current regime. And what else is not surprising is the brutality inflicted at those peaceful protesters. If they tried to protect themselves they were killed. Justice? Justice! Oh yeah.

Naive? To carry on ITW’s flawless rationale, naive is wise. To denigrate the peaceful protesters in Iran is like the ostrich who puts its head in the sand to try to avoid the truth. Max Shields, your incessant protective arguments of the IRI makes you sound like an Irani national. You should at least be honest about it! Everyone has the right to speak in this country! Again, the argument about Iraq is a straw man. Consistently I have been more than critical of American preemptive war in Iraq. It has nothing to do with the brutality inflicted by the Irani government. Same with the argument using Tibet. Okay, I’ll give up an inch! Shame on us. But I won’t give up a mile…Shame on them! That, however, does not absolve Iran. Their token recount of the vote is laughable. Actually even the vote is not important and as I’ve said, Mousavi would not have been too much of a change. It is the masses of people who protested against the current Republic who are important.

4 people killed in the civil rights movement here in America?
You must be kidding. That only works if you don’t count lynchings and murders. Even the leaders were murdered such as MLK. Yes many of these were done by civilian militias, but many clearly had state sanctioning

And I’m sure you would count civilian militias in Iran, which by my reading are responsible for most if not all of the reported deaths.

I found this article by Uri Avnery very interesting, mostly because of its attempt at a broad perspective. It’s also particularly interesting that no one speaks of the hundreds of thousands coming out for the regime…but regardless:

I find the argument about peaceful demonstration rather naive. I don’t know how much of what’s happened in Iran is peaceful or not. It is fair to say that this turnout is greater than what we’ve seen while our government has killed over a million Iraqi and displaced millions more; not to mention the children left as orphans or limbless or dead because our our military attacks.

There is no shame here. There is this infintile notion of Iran and the righteousness of the demonstrators, just as there was with Tibet and elsewhere.

But our own immorality and bloodthirsty wars are simply yesterday’s news, even if they are occurring at this very moment.

Oh yeah, American police thugs regularly shoot protesters. Are you dreaming? Yeah, there was Kent State, 1970 and four people were killed. That was the only time that killing happened. And at large protests there are strong arm tactics that I think are over-reactive and the media an obsessive job of letting Americans and the world know about it. There is a line to be drawn between criminal rioting such as what happened in LA when Rodney King was beaten by the four thug policemen and peaceful protest that Jesse Jackson and Martin Luther King, Jr. always conducted. When NPR’s Amy Goodman, Democracy Now host, was wrongly and improperly arrested at the RNC and roughly handled, the world knew about it immediately. She and her colleagues were charged with a misdemeanor and released. There is no report on what she did with that misdemeanor charge. That is curious, isn’t it?

Way….ellll yes, Iran did reveal their basic use of brutality. It is their customary operating mode. Making a comparison with the USA or any other country is a straw man argument and does not absolve their killing and injuring those who protested. So you support the Islamic Republic of Iran’s oppressive government that beats and kills peaceful protesters, okay, that is your choice. But you lie when saying their tactics are roughly the same as those used here. And you lie when you say the protesters colluded with foreign powers. That is an unsubstantiated claim and perpetrated by IRI sympathizers. No proof is ever offered. Just hollow accusations. They do not want to admit that 13 and a half million people protested the current government. Don’t we wonder how the recount of 10% of 40 million votes is going?

While I believe that peaceful protesters should not be harassed or physically abused, not arrested, or otherwise detained, because it is their constitutional right to peaceful assembly and protest, I further believe in the law. It is the civilized way humans resolve conflict: the authorities who abuse protesters need to be sued in the courts and vilified in the press and broadcast media with visual coverage. These are options Iranis do not have, by the way. Yes, let the courts decide since that is the rational way to take care of criminality. But of course, there are those who can only be satisfied with shedding blood in retaliation and blaming the US for their deficiency, and on a more minor scale simply call names of those who disagree. It is the easy self-serving way instead of seeing their own part in causing the evils in the world.

You too are transparent and if one doesn’t agree with you, your style is to simply claim they are deficient in some way or another and you will make something up as foul as you can.
*********************************************

It’s the entry exam to achieve “Candidate Membership” in “The Contingent”. Black is White, Up is Down, Bad is Good, and a right-wing religious ideologue who, if he was Christian would make Pat Robertson look mild, is a Leftist, Progressive gentle soul and really a democrat. (of course I mean Khatamei)

The tactics they are using are roughly the same as those used here. Fire hoses, tear gas, batons.
Its clear that they were ordered not to open fire on the protesters, many of the police are actually un-armed.

In 2008 we had protests at the RNC that in no way was threatening to overthrow our government. hundreds were arrested, including journalists, tear gas was used, people were beaten. And again, this was a small protest with no serious chance of gaining any momentum
In Iran we have much more serious protests, and lets be honest, rioters and people colluding with foreign powers. None of which was the case in our recent protests. But think back a few decades to when there were serious protests here, and our death and arrest counts dwarf theirs

Personally I commend Iran for not totally freaking out, as they easily could.

Well I really love my piggy bank, I’ve had it since childhood! And it is a treasure (not much money in it but it is still full) and I was using it for a wager. The wager is metaphoric anyway and there is no danger of my losing the piggy bank! Sorry you are always so darkly sober Max. It must be dismal to be in your shoes. At least in my winsome way I provide music and mirth every so often. Neither of which you don’t seem to have any capacity to appreciate. Too bad.

Critical thinking? I think we are on different planets. I teach critical thinking. You too are transparent and if one doesn’t agree with you, your style is to simply claim they are deficient in some way or another and you will make something up as foul as you can. Yes, the Iranian neo-revolution will be over soon. The strong arm of oppression cut them at the knees. They were a peaceful protest, but the brutal government used guns and clubs on them. I will never forget that. They will never forget that. The neo-revolution will fester and will raise its ugly head again. I’ve already made my bet on it. It is like a hydra now. Cut one head off (which is the favorite pastime of the Islamists) and another ten grows in its place! Che is dead and Castro will soon be. And Cuba is only waiting with bated breath to rejoin the western world. Already Raul is making overtures to the US, allowing people to visit relatives in Cuba. It is all too obvious, all too human, all too political.

I caught your meaning in your question about the Shah and the protesters. You make incredible claims without any proof except your own intuition. And that is unreliable. If the total number of votes was approximately 40 million and Ahmadinejad received 62.6%, that means 13,500,000 protested. That is not a paltry amount of people. Not negligible. 13 1/2 million people are not going to forget very easily how they have been deprived of their voice, their freedom, and their safety. It is historic.

The thing is that Ahmadinejad and the Islamic Republic of Iran earn the demonization themselves. I rarely read reports about them, “objective” news is non-existent, even the CounterPunch article you just provided. But when the principles speak publicly, I listen. Every article written is written with a bias. I abhor pundits as they are puffed up with themselves and love to hear themselves talk. They are under pressure to make blatant statements, flimsy criticisms, and pontifications. I peruse all the media to get a ‘sense’ of what is going on, not any definitive reportage of what ‘is’ going on. I lament the dearth of accurate reporting. I retain qualified skepticism. For instance, should we be surprised that the US wants to delegitimize Iranian Elections? When Ahmadinejad sits in an audience listening to the Supreme Leader and crows along with the rest of the mob, death to America, I take it personally because I am one of those Americans for whom they want my death! I dont’ care how they got there, for it is all politics about power and wealth, both sides, them and us and the fact that they want my death is not only outrageous but immoral. While it is true many American politicians severely criticize Iran, and we all know they are pursuing the making of nuclear weapons whether you want to admit it or not, you never see large groups of Americans shouting death to Iran! At least I never do and I keep a fairly good eye out for such things. The world needs less WMDs not more! The world is already trying to defuse another crazy country, North Korea.

I’ve already said I highly doubt the protesters are after a Shah-colored westernization. Their model is America. A fact you are determined to deny.

You miss the thrust of what I was saying. I don’t know how many Iranians might prefer the “Westernization” embodied in the reign of the Shah. Piggy banks are irrelevant and not make for a cogent argument.

But the thrust is what the US does, and the history of Iran and US intervention throughout its history and the hundreds of millions of US dollars that have been pumped in to destablize the regime. You avoid this either because you don’t know US/Iranian history or because it is more convenient to talk around the issue.

You are rather transparent. You believe what the media tells you. Critial thinking is not your forte. The Obama administration is just perfect and so now whatever goes on in the world is someone else’s fault not the US. I’m speculating, of course, but this is the image you are painting of yourself here.

Neo-revolution? Does that mean happen when you’re packing twitter?

Just watched the film Che. That’s a revolution.

Iran will be quiet (it’s already diminishing). So your neo-revolution will be over soon.

Sometimes I wonder if you have some sort of a persecution complex KDelphi. I didnt say that I agreed with the Bolivarian article. I was merely presenting evidence that dissent does go on in Vemezuela [sic] and YOU were the one who brought up Chavez in the first place. Okay, where exactly did I indicate that you agreed with the article? Actually Max Shields brought up Chavez back on June 27, 1:11pm. I read the article and gave my opinion. I didn’t mentioned you or even imply anything about what you might believe. Looking back it looks like we agreed on the fact that dissent goes on in Venezuela.

Part of my comments at 1:27pm were obviously directed at Gulam’s June 27 5:50pm questions.

There are lots of Iranis in America, Max Shields, and they have been interviewed on the various news programs as to their reactions of the events in Iran these last couple of weeks. Why not ask them if the protesters would have supported the Shah? I’d bet my piggy bank (it’s full) none of them would. There was not one word from the protesters to bring back the Shah! Some reporter would certainly have reported it as they have obsessed over that revolution (you call it rebellion, Max, I call it a neo-revolution, the likes of which never happened before, even when they brought down the Shah).

This is off topic, but, as long as we’re on the subject of Latin Am…http://www.soaw.org/

(School of the Americas Watch)

“Military Coup in Honduras”
A military coup has taken place in Honduras this morning (Sunday, June 28), led by School of the Americas (SOA) graduate Romeo Vasquez. In the early hours of the day, members of the Honduran military surrounded the presidential palace and forced the democratically elected president, Manuel Zelaya, into custody. He was immediately flown to Costa Rica.

The Honduran state television was taken off the air. The electricity supply to the capital Tegucigalpa, as well telephone and cellphone lines were cut. The people of Honduras are going into the streets. From Costa Rica, President Zelaya has called for a non-violent response from the people of Honduras, and for international solidarity for the Honduran democracy

“[I took] a course in intelligence at the school of the Americas [in which I saw] a lot of videos which showed the type of interrogation and torture they used in Vietnam. Although many people refuse to accept it, all this is organized by the U.S. government.”
- José Valle, graduate of the SOA, admitted torturer, member of Battalion 316, Inside the School of Assassins, video

There are videos there, also..

If td wont print the link, it is at School of the Americas Watch (soa.org)

First, the term “revolution” has been so watered down to be used as pure propaganda. The government has not been overturned, and likely will not be.

The Green seems in this case to be very much aligned with the Islamic Revolution of ‘79, not separate from it. Whether Iran is going through some stage of transformation remains to be seen.

But as any ready of recent history - last 30 years will note that Iran has a context. You, She, seem to delight in ignoring it. You won’t even recognize the hundreds of millions thrown in to destablize the regime starting with GWB and continued recently with similar request by Obama.

You seem to ignore (or be ignorant of) the position of Iran vis a vis the US. The Shah was the US’s proxy with Israel they assured US hegemony in the region. When the Shah as ousted (remember how the Shah got into power?) that put the US into a quandry. The US gov’t supported Saddam with weapons to overtake the Iranian regime. Later Iraq was invaded in 1990 and continued to be a target of US regime change and ultimately to ensure US bases to replace what was lost when the Shah was gone from Iran.

All of this cannot be ignored by anyone who wants to understand this situation.

Neither you nor I really know what this rebellion is about or what the exact numbers are. Time will tell.

I don’t care about how many votes Chavez got regarding the change to the Venezuelian constitution. What difference does it make?

The main difference in Mexico is that there were not hundreds of millions of US dollars supporting the destablization of the oligarchy which the US just loves. It would have been a major upset for US interests to have a leftist regime just south of its borders in North America. That’s why you didn’t hear much in the media.

Your questions are, using truedigger3’s favorite word, like it or not, pedant, Max Shields. I already noted in the case of Venezuela, 46.6% explicitly shows there was no mandate. Call it anything you like. Any clever politician can get rabble to rouse in the streets. How many millions roused in Venezuela compared to the “real” neo-revolution, the effects of which will reverberate from now until they are satisfied, in Iran. It is a bit harder to get “real” news. But the iPhones and other such ‘unreal’ media is neutralizing that.

The ongoing protests have been given several titles including the Green Revolution or Sea of Green, due to presidential candidate Mousavi’s campaign color, and the Persian Awakening http://english/farsnews.com is not accessible by ordinary browser means, by the way??? the Wikipedia entry on the Iranian election protests is extremely telling. Why isn’t the farsnews service available? Iran is blocking all access! Dont’ you love it?

Some portion of the protesters are registering their dislike???? Max Shields? Like millions are some??? see http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2009/06/video-15th-june-2009-millions-protest.html for a slide show, the video is not available with the very lame excuse of copyright law. That is bullshit. But the slides are there and one needs only to scroll through them to see what happened. Your defense of Ahmadenijad is your choice of course. Tyranny attracts all kinds for any number of reasons.

There is just a tiny comparison between Iran and what happened in Mexico. It might have been “hotly contested” but the will of the people was fairly quiet in comparison. I personally was not happy with Calderon’s re-election and suspected there was various kinds of coercions and corruptions at play, I did wonder about it. Even with the students and teachers riots and labor unions violent protest in Oaxaca, you didn’t see millions of young adults and old people flocking to the streets and dying and being beaten for their disenfranchised freedoms against the Presidential election. It was a different kind of football game! Ahmadinejad demonizes himself. No, of course he is not The Dictator, the Supreme Leader is. AMJD is only a mouthpiece. I do not argue that Iran shed the shackles of the Shah. (oh what a nice alliteration that one was!). A people must always rid themselves of the vermin that oppresses them. But as I said, trading one despot for another is not progress and a great unprecedented (word used by the Supreme Leader) number of Iranians spoke out this time. With their being murdered and beaten, the memory will not go away. It will wait for another “right” moment. Quite frankly, I think the regime of the Shah is a dead issue. The youth of Iran have no memory of that species of oppression. They are reacting to the 40 years of the heavy fist of the Islamic Republic.

Some things we agree on and some we don’t KDelphi. I agree deeply that Latin and South America needs to reconstruct its economy to benefit the people there. Corruption has existed there for so long that bloody revolution in the shape of the Cuban one will probably be the only way to rectify the travesty that has existed there almost in their entire history. Peasant exploitation is historic. However, once a major revolution takes place, it needs benevolent leaders who also are controlled so that natural corruption does not emerge (which it will try given the penchant for men to be greedy and lust for power). I have to refer over and over to Eric Hoffer’s incredible insight presented in his tiny little book, The True Believer. Revolution can be a good thing, ala the American Revolution in 1776. Or it can run amuck ala the French Revolution. More talk about this later, have to get some mundane things done today.

She—I didnt say that I agreed with the Bolivarian article. I was merely presenting evidence that dissent does go on in Vemezuela and YOU were the one who brought up Chavez in the first place.

They issue statements as Parties. I have seen other groups doing such over this Iran mess.

I dont necessarily support Chavez (COLD WARCOMMUNISM!! AAUUGGH!—we really need to get over that one, otherwise we will let “free mkt Capiotalists” take more of our money!), what I support is Latin Am taking back its own economics and resourese, instead of allowing Imperialist industry to come in, take indigenous peoples’ land, build a dirty factory on it and put them to work in it for 6 cents an hour, thus “
freeing” them. (neo-liberalim)

Iran’s Mousavi would be one devil for another and I think you agree with that. (especially considering his prior history in Iran)

I agree that it MAY now be something more, but, that to think that the US had no role in the protests is just naive, I believe. I didnt say that I thought it was a workers struggle and neither did the article—-they said that it should BECOME a general strike—and I wish that it could. (I have much doubt)

BTW—I think you mentioned Lebanon?? Well, the US gave money to the candidate of our “govt’s choice”. Here is one site concerned with whether the IMF and Us would cut off “aid” if Hizbollah had won.

“..Going to very popular leftist web sites and finding myself seemingly all alone in this opinion, I was very despairing that people who understood capitalism could not understand its consequences, namely imperialism. Now, I see that Paul Craig Roberts, Phil Wilayto, James Petras and others have joined me in my opinion. Michael Parenti once called the CIA, “Capitalism’s International Army,” and I couldn’t express the situation any better…’‘

The article is very hard to “parse out”, so if someone wants the essence of it, they will have to read it.

Here is another one: (same site)but there are others at counterpunch and other sites.

“..The problem we confront as ‘consumers’ of ‘news’ are our inbuilt assumptions that we bring to our interpretation of the headlines and the messages they carry. Messages that reinforce the illusion that only we in the West live in democracies (as self-defined by the West). And this illusion helps shape the justification for the media’s intervention, so powerful is the role of the media in today’s world, especially so given that we have no such pervasive voice of our own that can compete.”

Can’t help but wonder how many of these protesters would have supported the Shah?

In Mexico, 3 years ago, there was an election which was hotly contested, but found no media support or any particular movement to support our neighbors to the south overcome the oligarchy that rules; where nearly all the wealth of that nation resides.

An attempt to make a difference where there were similar cries of voting inpropieties were summoned. Where was the outcry, Shenonymous?

Iran has a context, a geopolitical context that simply cannot be ignored even if some portion of the protesters are registering their dislike for the regime for whatever reason(s).

Hundreds of millions of dollars(and now Obama has requested even more) have been thrown into Iran to destablize it. This is the same MO used by the US imperialism the world over.

Ahmadinejad has been demonized by the press and pundits over the last 5 years beyonod human recognition. He never said he wanted to destroy Israel (which was repeated just this morning on Meet the Press); he has never denied the Holocaust (he has questioned the numbers and why instead of Europe/Germany providing a nation-state, the people of Palestine were removed from their farms and towns to make way for this “country” to pay for said Holocaust.

Ahmadinejad has no control over the military nor the nuclear development; but he is used “She” by you and the media to repeatedly make the case for an evil-dictator (when he is not such, certainly he is no dictator).

But none of this is meant to support Ahmadinejad’s election. On the other hand, you simply cannot, as a thoughtful person disregard what has been happening since his election and since the original REAL revolution in ‘79 to oust the Shah (a true supporter of the West in the region and one of the reasons why the US invaded Iraq (i.e., to replace the role the Shah had as a launch for US interests in the region.)

Still one cannot help but wonder, how many of these protesters are simply a vestige of the Shah, of an oligarcy and how much is part of the millions poured in to destablize? And of that what is left of a “real revolution” in Iran?

Regarding Chavez’s president-for-life referendum (yes, yes, I know it was a term-limits issue. It unquestionably was a ruse), 53.4% of a vote is not a mandate. 46.6% dissent says more than a little heap.

Trading one devil for another is worth a comparison, so is trading one despot for another and the people, especially the poor, ought to be grateful. Oh yeah.

No equivocation, it is not extraordinary that the Marxist article, a voice for Communism, would support Chavez and denounce Iran. That they approve and uphold the common people who revolted against the Islamic Republic of Iran is consistent with their communist-socialist doctrines. Iran is definitely not Marxist! Reading the article it seems they have some insight clarifying the differences between Venezuela and Iran. I don’t think there is much of a similarity between Chavez and Ahmadinejad. Chavez is at least clever, while Ahmadinejad is a hand-picked buffoon puppet of the Supreme Leader. I think the unnamed author of the article rightly describes the relative political stance of Ahmadinejad and Mousavi. As I noted earlier, Mousavi is a convenient designee for the purposes of the neo-revolution. He provided a focal point while the real revolution erupted. However, he would not restore the freedoms lost over the term of the Islamic Republic. This neo-revolution was not instigated by the dogmas of marxism. Those people want the freedoms as expressed in the countries of the west, American democracy and capitalism being the paradigms. While Chavez may call his political posture socialistic, he is craftily constructing an autocracy. Power corrupts is the axiom, and it results in absolute power corrupting absolutely. Irani protesters did not show posters appealing to Chavez! If the Marxists want to align their sympathies with the neo-revolutionaries of Iran rather than counterrevolutionaries that is fine, it is appropriate to their beliefs, but they should not be delusional in thinking that the ‘blue’ collar working class in Iran is the group in revolt. They should remember, as they themselves pointed out, Chavez did a kissy kissy poo to Ahmadinejad! It is pure politics, ideologies are only excuses.

Communism typically fosters despots: as we witnessed Stalin and Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Castro and now Chavez. Seems there is no uneasiness for tyrants to take hold, mainly because the poor are kept ignorant and oppressed and without exception used as war fodder.

What business do Americans have passing judgment on the government of Iran and its elections is a ridiculous question. When people are beaten and murdered it is the whole world’s business. When people’s human rights are decimated and suppressed it is the whole world’s business. I didn’t notice America telling the Irani people to revolt over the clearly odd election results. Regardless the people were just waiting for an excuse like a festering boil waiting to pop. Millions of Iranis expressed their wrath and disgust at the theocratic despotism they lived under for decades. If America had anything at all to do with the unrest there, then the unprecedented millions of Iranis who protested and gave their lives and were beaten agreed with America! Did you notice all the placards that were written in English. They were appealing, yes ‘appealing’ to America to help them. America is doing a lot right right now and they have as much right to see and comment on what atrocities are going on in the world as any other country. Besides Americans can’t help it and can’t keep their mouths shut! They are an opinionated mouthy bunch. Notice all of us on this blog. Ever notice how many blogs there are?

It is obvious that no amount of comments are going to do either the Palestinians or the Israelis any good or change what is happening in Iran. It makes us feel better and since we don’t live in those countries and suffer they way they do, our feeling better is arrogant and self-serving.

She—Winning by more than 50% is hardly something that USAns have a right to criticize. If you have some inside knowledge as to your question “how much of it was coerced”, tell Obama—maybe he’ll want to invade.

I think that Cubans are much better off under Castro then they were under Batista…I wonder how all these countries in our own hemisphere became so ‘anti-American”...they must just be evil ...

It isnt about Chavez, Castro or Morales—or Obama…In LA it is about economics and shedding US Imperialism, which will happen with or without “Chavezism”—we just dont have the neo-liberal bucks to control them anymore..If it becomes more about Chavez (as with Castro), then it will be a shame. But, that is none of our business, especially when, as you say, he was popularly elected and will have to be again to serve as president…

You know that we have decided to send diplomats back—I dont know what will come of it, but I dont really give a damn what he says about Obama.

So Bolivia would be better off under Spanish or pseudo-American rule , than the popularly elected Morales? I suppose he wasnt popularly elected either, in your opinion.

With the US history of internvention (indeed , the Anglo-Europeans in general) we have no business saying anything about the political situtaion in Latin America. (or Iran)

If they have problems, at least part of it is our fault.I know that it really cheeses US Imperialists when people who come from the poor win in Latin American, but, I think theyve had enough of the Shock Doctrine..the leaders there are, at least, keeping the oil money there instead of importing more US industry which just destroys the environemnt and the indigenous people.

I have to go off of this thread to go to the link…i just dont have enough RAM…be back, I guess, if there is anything to say…

I see, She, but it is not a referendum to make him “pres for life”—he has to run again and, I think the US should stop talking about coercion in other countries elections until they take all the lobbying money out of their own.

The article sounds pretty balanced, quoting supporters as well as detractors..

But, as you say, you “hate all politicians”..well, I think we all do (well, some here are loyal to noe party or another)..but US politicians tend to have more impact on other countries policies than vice-versa.

Your right, Virgina. I subscrubed because they occasionally have pieces by seymour Hirsh and Jean Mayer that are exceptional. but they have gotten more aweful otherwise. I’m not going to renew and I’ll tell them what you said.

Fourteen months after his first attempt failed, Chávez won the referendum in February 2009 to eliminate term limits, paving the way for a permanent dynastic rule to carry out his species of socialist transformation of Venezuela. Just look at Castro’s Cuba to see how communism fails. To keep Cubans from leaving his despotic government he made it a crime to leave Cuba. Such freedom communism brings. The Chavez measure won 54.3% of the vote. That is kind of close, no? Now we have to wonder why he thinks he needs to ram socialism down Venezuelan throats if he is so popular and the public truly was given a free vote. Truth is obvious, his program is not as popular as he had hoped so he had to shove it through. I wonder how much of that 54.3% of the vote was coerced? What kind of totalitarian despotism is Chavez carving out for himself? Now isn’t it rather curious and funny that also in February 2009 Chavez expressed a desire to “repair relations with the United States, especially after having said that Obama had the same stink as Bush? The megalomania flipfloppishness is amusing if not downright ludicrous. It is shit politics and everyone who is conscious knows that politics has no ethics including the USA politicians, all of them. There is not a decent politician in the entire world. What gets done depends entirely on who has the power and the rest can kiss his ass.

Poor Simon Bolivar’s ardent desire to be permanent supreme leader of Bolivia just did not happen. Read The General in His Labyrinth by Gabriel Garcia Marquez to see how opponents contributed to his defeat. So much for liberators. Bolivar’s people turned against the “Liberator,’ few political comrades remained loyal, and in his attempt to leave Bolivia, he never escapes. In the words of Sartre: “There is no exit” to the hell one creates for oneself.

I watched the 2006 video Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land. The occupation of the West Bank by Israel certainly looks like it is an offensive one and not defensive as often claimed. Severe treatment is seen in the film and described by people taped not limited to Arabs but includes Israelis and other outsiders. It is truly a miserable way for human beings to live, both the Palestinians and the Israelis who inflict the misery. The various forms of oppression is a horrible way to live, an inhuman way to live, and the violation of human rights and torture is as repulsive as it can get. But it must be kept in mind that the hostility emerges because this is how men treat one another. Those Arabs who capture Israelis and other non-Arabs don’t treat their hostages civilly as well. The antagonism between Israel and the Arab world, in this case the Palestinians, is ancient. There is no assertion, most definitely not by me, that Israel is immaculate and without deplorable actions. The struggle is beyond logic and may not be reconcilable. Both sides are guilty of atrocities and barbarities. The Palestinians are not innocent by any means. It is not out of the realm of possibilities that the Israelis could also produce a propaganda video that shows violence done to them by the Arab world. Would that be received just as compassionately?

It would only be constructive for outsiders such as myself and you all instead of offering a shopping list of all the terrible things each side does to each other rather to talk about how the enmity can be resolved so that both sides can live with it. There is a mountain of emotion to get past on both sides Jew and Arab. Both sides need criticism within to get the reparation started.

What business do Americans have passing judgment on the government of Iran and its elections, especially when American elections are such a fraud that vast numbers of people never vote? This is the real problem in Afghanistan and Iraq is it not? Americans and Europeans think they have a right to tell everyone else on earth how to run their lives. With all that America is doing wrong right now how dare you shift the discussion to such marginal concerns as an election in Iran?

Everyone knows that the amendment he tried to add to the constitution , that would allow him to RUN for the presidency as many times as he wished, was voted down by the people and that he accepted their decision.

Sounds like democracy to me.

Whether he will in the future remains to be seen, but, if Venezuela is to have its own future, the US had best STOP trying to “promote” “democracyandfreedom” at gunpoint and by depriving people of water in LA!

There is no comparison with “Chavez’” Venezuela and “Ahmadinejad’s” Iran…Chavez made a statement upon his hearing of Ahmadinejad “winning”
the presidency, but, the Bolivarian Govt had something different to say—I dont see people being shot in the streets there over it, either.

Solidarity with the movement of the Iranian masses – Statement of the Revolutionary Marxist Current (Venezuela)
By Revolutionary Marxist Current
“In response to recent statements by Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, the Venezuelan Revolutionary Marxist Current has issued this statement. They express their support for the movement of the masses in Iran and explain the differences between the revolutionary movement in Venezuela and the counter-revolutionary regime in Iran.”

“...On June 18, president Chávez once again congratulated Ahmadinejad on his reelection as a president and added the “solidarity of Venezuela in the face of the attack by world capitalism against the people of that country”. The Revolutionary Marxist Current in Venezuela, disagrees with this position and we would like to contribute to the debate with the above observations….”

“...With this comparison they want to saw confusion amongst workers around the world, weaken the sympathy and support for the Venezuelan revolution and undermine it as a point of reference for millions around the world. It is precisely for this reason that Venezuelan revolutionary workers and youth can only counter this campaign by opening a serious debate about the real character of the Iranian regime, studying its history and the current situation, and showing our solidarity with our Iranian class brothers and sisters in their struggle to conquer, through mass action, the same rights that Venezuelan workers have today. At the same time we must fight and denounce both the government’s repression against our brothers and sisters as well as the demagogy and manoeuvres of imperialism….

... particularly the movement of Iranian workers for democratic rights and economic demands, while at the same time we reject any imperialist interference.”

It doesnt look like a “workers revolution” to me, but, it may be possible for it to become one, if Capitalists will stay out of it and not look to set up franchises.

And, the World Socialist Web Site (4th Intl) holds a completely different view—that it is a “revolution ” of “personal freedoms” by the burgeouis….I would agree that, it certainly started out as one, with an undeniuable number of Iranian-Am pundits coming out of seemingly nowhere, reminding me of Iraq’s Curve Ball..all western educated, etc.. What it could become should be completely for the people of Iran to decide—but I do know that it is NOT “all about the uS”, considering our recent history of non-democracy.

The view that Socialism = “Russia”= Cold War is a very old one that needs to lie down and die.

The world spins on repellent views and yes freedoms of speech, assembly, and the pursuit of happiness (whatever that might mean) is my world view and apparently counter to yours, which might be what, precisely? Thralldom, slavery of the mind, oppression by theocratic decree? Okay, that is your prerogative. If you care to look beyond your own racist nose, you would have noticed within all of my posts on the topic that I too denounce what Israel has done to Palestinians. Isn’t it interesting we saw Hezbollah beaten in Lebanon! The will of the people will prevail eventually. I denounce all brutality. It is just that you do not want to acknowledge that Hamas and Palestinians who support them do just as many atrocities. The Arab/Israeli conflict is tit for tat, except teeny tiny Israel is tougher than its enemies who are a big but not as smart Goliath. Okay, again that is your prerogative to ignore the facts of my views. What kind of cogent fact-based argument is acceptable for the striving for freedoms that are inherent and inalienable? To perceive that I carry a chip is shortsighted, purposely shortsighted. The only thing that sticks in my craw are extremists like yourself who chose to see the world only one way. That goes for extremists on either side of the divided line, left or right. You are both mad. Latinisms are used only to break the intensity. If you cannot appreciate a bit of levity then the chip you carry is a log! Yeah, I strike back when attacked and ONLY when attacked. I just happen to be good at retaliation and um over ejumakated. Kaint spel tho… itz werth sh*t. Yeah, it is well-known also that I have a potty mouth on occasion though I do try to control it, sometimes…most of the time. I take after my favorite nephew. F*ck grace. I don’t know who she is but please be gentle. I’ve called for respect and politeness (uh, could that be grace?) too many times to expect it from the likes of you and the rest of the Contingent. So yall can goes ta hell.

Yes I do know about the rich, Republican Mayor of NYC. I have the same opinion of that piece of political shit as I do of Chavez’s self-serving set up. It is a nazi tactic, or very much like King James who thought he was appointed by god. Power knows no political party. Autocracy is an opiate for power-hungry men.

The half-assed appeasement to count 10% of the votes in Iran is pathetic. Just as pathetic as the American stolen election in 2000 and 2004. It is power that rules the world and greed and ambitious men war for it. Who exactly do you represent, Max Shield? Certainly not the ordinary people. Between your side and the right, ordinary people don’t have a rat’s ass chance in hell at a decent life. It is totally irrelevant at this point whether or not Ahmadinejad took 63% of the vote to 34% for Mousavi. What is relevant is that nearly half the people of Iran are not happy with the despotic theocracy. That is all that is important out of this unprecedented revolution there. It will reverberate through the future and Iran will change. The beast of freedom has been let loose.

It is time to go tend to the garden. I know you will take your best shots at me whist I’m gone.

By Folktruther, June 27 at 1:14 am #
This story about “who actually won” is common and will be an urban myth for years to come; but I do believe that with that myth will rise from the undercurrent a better understanding of what caused this? Who leads this? Was this a simple convergence over general bent up frustration with manipulative powers?

I don’t think this is an enduring movement. However, it could happen again. Venezuela had the same thing, incited by…you guessed it the US. But this stuff is old hat. Why would one think that Iranians are immune from this kind of US intrusion. The US has been, through proxies, supporting death squads in Lebanon and frankly it is this “low intensity” warfare that is a major part of the US military operating procedures. South and Central America have been the laboratories for this kind of US warfare and it is used all the time.

And the corporate owned media plays its part. Didn’t read the New Yorker, but it wouldn’t suprise me in the least if they are hoping on the Iranian “power to the people” propaganda train with both feet.

Folktruther just keep on digging and posting…

Now…

By Shenonymous, June 27 at 8:30 am #

While I won’t ask you to come up with references, because frankly you can support just about any ideology and you definitely have a worldview that, while repellent to me, is a YOUR view.

It’s not as repellent as racism or what Zionists are doing in the Palestinian lands, but it is a change view of the facts. But again, it’s all yours (and I’m sure there are a few on here who more or less agree). But agreement doesn’t make for a cogent fact based argument. There’s more anger than anything else and it seems at once pointed at people like Chavez and the people of Venezuela (by the way you do know that the change to term limit for the President of Venezuela is the same in many European countries and the Mayor of NYC was just granted more or less the same…go figure!)

But all the facts aside, you may want to revisit that chip you’re carrying. When you post latinisms it doesn’t come across as “smart” but rather as a powerful case of inferiority complexity.

I understand your desire to “strike back” but a little grace would help your case, even if the facts don’t always support it.

Venezuela is run by Supreme Leader Thug-King Hugo Chavez. President for Life. The indelible motto of Thug-Kings “Keep the general public ignorant and they will be thrilled to be thralls.” Sort of like munchkins. You won’t have to feed them very well, provide decent schools, decent health care, or decent housing. Then you will have money to invest in weapons for internal control as well as external intrusions. The Western Hemisphere needs to be vigilant that Chavez doesn’t want to built a nuclear weapons program just like their clone brothers in Iran (he does and we all know it). Power inexorably brings on insanity. Problem is when the general public of Venezuela are outfitted with iPhones, and they will be you can bet on it, the young people will revolt because no one who has any intelligence wants to be kept in a mental pig pen, blood will be in the streets just like Iran. The US will not have to lift a finger. American youth provide the model, whether they are incensed with shabby chic, Sonic Youth, or drugs du jour. It just doesn’t mattah dahlink. And these mindless will be our mindless and corrupt self-serving politicians of the fewcha. It’s in the cards.

It is a laugh riot that the Russians are providing the makings of a weapons factory to Hugo and instigating a communist-based regime, counter to any American effort to promote democracy (ah, because in a democracy the people have a real voice), but even communism won’t work there because Venezuela is a serfdom, a neo-baronial systematic bondage system (which it never does in the end, they all fall down just like all the members of a ring of red rosies have always fallen down, it’s just a mattah of tyme) .

Mousavi doesn’t matter at all really in Iran. He already served his purpose. The real phenomenon is the youth and their indomitable will to communicate with and belong to the world, not to a tyrannical system of torture and death for daring to be free thinkers. The youth is envious beyond belief of the freedoms in the West. They will prevail. As I already said, “It’s in the Cards.”

Max,there is a bad New Yorker article about Iran and it appears that some of the “Reformists” actually think they won the election. The reason is that the professional-managerial class is collected in a compact mass in certain areas of Tehran which Mossavi probably did win. the Reformists than assumed that this was the case for all of Iran.

It is the natural assumption that people tend to have: everyone is like me. I prefer this so everyone else does. so there is an element of sincerity in the rank and file when their leaders tell them that they actually won. the leaders are quite cynical of course.

There does appear to be a class polerization in Iran, like that of Venzueala, which the US successfully widened. Buy will it stay wide when the young understand how they have been duped? I don’t know. Hopefully, however, the regime will stop irritating them with the relgious police, although it is not near as bad as Saudi Arabia.

The good part is that the US has apparently switched from bombing to manipulation and terrorism, which reduces the amount of US slaughter.

KDelphi, I don’t know how you reasoned and got the impression that I said you had ‘attacked’ me! You might go back and reread my response with a little less egoism. I was speaking about those who regularly attack people’s character rather than their ideas and they do it maliciously. truedigger3 and Ed Harges of late. KDelphi for as long as we have posted on the same forums disagreeing has not been very often but I believe we have been very civil about it when we did, quite frankly I can’t remember what we disagreed about. Hmmm,... oh well.

nefesh is playing a game that does not particularly interest me.

MeHere your whining is hysterical. It is customary among some of the denizens on these forums to purposely misread what has been said. Some are theatrically quick to jump to conclusions, just to use the ‘shiny’ moment to slam bam at someone, especially those who don’t agree with their point of view. It is better to worry about yourself and let others worry about themselves. Or are you making a little red rule book for us all to follow? There is a word for that!

Hundreds of countries the world over? Really, Max Shields? Can you name them? At least some of them, how about just 10 of them? So what are you saying about this desire for freedom? Since you apparently have it, is it the case that those poor pawns ought not to want freedoms because their desire is really for the benefit of others? I see. Real altruism at work here.

The censorship by the government of Iran of information about what is being reported is sinister and thousands of protesters’ lives are in deadly peril. While it is atrocious, what has been unveiled is the utter and complete relinquishment of liberty under a rigid theocratic dictatorship and forced suppression of its opposition by the Irani government. This is a lesson for the whole earth to gain consciousness of the regression that can happen to societies when a severe and brutal theocratic system of government has absolute power. The pawns that gave up their lives, and those who will now also give up their lives are martyrs for freedom and liberty. It is a revolution and Iran will never be the same.

Just a comment directed at people who post and are constantly accusing others of lack of clarity and demand that they define terms, back up what they say with data, evidence, etc.

I believe this is a site for comments, ideas, discussion. It is neither a court of law nor a place to defend academic research where things need to be heavily substantiated. One can agree, disagree and say so and why or, one can submit another angle, or one can say nothing. But why try to win an argument by resorting to the strategy of making someone’s comment appear vague and without foundation? It is dishonest, it contributes nothing, and there’s nothing to win.. Many people have easy access to a great deal of data and/or have the time to submit it - and I appreciate it. Others simply don’t find it is necessary to do that in order to share their views which can often be very interesting and enlightening.

Does anyone remember Bush’s 2007 Iran destabilization program for the tune of $400 million?

Are we connecting the dots or think all of this in Iran does not have it’s genesis with US/Euro/Israel destablization of the regime is more than a little naive.

We know this story; or have we forgotten how we’ve done this over and over. Think just back to Iraq. US tried to upend the Saddam regime, gave up, made up WMDs and invaded. But Plan A was to have an internal revolt. This is the US imperial empire’s mo. It’s been done in hundreds of countries the world over.

Does that mean there aren’t some who would like to have more freedom of one sort or another? No, but those are the first pawns in this geopolitical power game.

The truly significant result of the suppressed Iranian revolt is that the most important Islamist radical movement in the contemporary world has demonstrated that it has become a brutally repressive dictatorship whose leaders rig elections and beat down clear popular demands for a true election count or repeat of the election itself.

This affair has nothing to do with the alleged war of civilizations or the machinations of the American Great Satan, or of the hereditary enemy of Iran, the British Empire. It is the consequence of the abuse of power by leaders who established a new form of religious republic…

First Pfaff (I like that alliteration) writes the only cogent and fully honest analysis I’ve seen to date from him - a completely unexpected pleasure on this website that may never be repeated.

Then ‘The Contingent’ falls all over themselves in an apoplectic round of ‘neolibcon pseudo-Progressive Truther, Zionist tail-wagging, turn-a-blind-eye-to-tyranny-if-that-tyranny-hates-Jews-and- Zionists-and-America’ Twister. Now they are all tied up in knots because Pfaff (and Hedges as well as Fisk) have put the children of Mao-Town here on notice - how far they have drifted from even mainstream leftist dogma.

The truly significant result of the suppressed Iranian revolt is that the most important Islamist radical movement in the contemporary world has demonstrated that it has become a brutally repressive dictatorship whose leaders rig elections and beat down clear popular demands for a true election count or repeat of the election itself.

This affair has nothing to do with the alleged war of civilizations or the machinations of the American Great Satan, or of the hereditary enemy of Iran, the British Empire. It is the consequence of the abuse of power by leaders who established a new form of religious republic…</blockquote>

First Pfaff (I like that alliteration) writes the only cogent and fully honest analysis I’ve seen to date from him - a completely unexpected pleasure on this website that may never be repeated.

Then ‘The Contingent’ falls all over themselves in an apoplectic round of ‘neolibcon pseudo-Progressive Truther, Zionist tail-wagging, turn-a-blind-eye-to-tyranny-if-that-tyranny-hates-Jews-and-Zionists-and-America’ Twister. Now they are all tied up in knots because Pfaff (and Hedges as well as Fisk) have put the children of Mao-Town here on notice - how far they have drifted from even mainstream leftist dogma.

How heart worming that “nefesh” wants to see Shyno.
My heart is melting. As I guessed it correctly, they are so close, and guess what, he is calling from AIPAC. Congratulations Shyno, you made the grade!!.

How heart worming that “nefesh” wants to see Shyno.
My heart is melting. As I guessed it correctly, they are so close, and guess what, he is calling from AIPAC. Congratulations Shyno, you made the grade!!.

Hi there, Shenonymous.
I’m enjoying reading your posts and the reflexive vitriol they generate. I would like to contact you outside of this playpen, but I don’t want to put an email address down, for obvious reasons, nor will you. How can I do this, then?

Things never are the way they seem: Picked up from reddit.com with some commentary of my own, this is a very interesting blog - during their war with Iraq, Iran needed massive numbers of expendable troops for human wave attacks into heavily mined no-man’s-lands between fortified front lines. Such is the importance of the individual in this earthly existence. We ought not to hear and speak, hypocritically, about the value of human life, now, ought we?

A nationalist campaign was started to get every patriotic family to give one son to the Basij militia. It is so much easier to get children to do stupid things than adults. The Nazis knew that, didn’t they? Does the United States use children to do their dirty work? Course the young soldiers Bush sent to Iraq could be nearly equivalent.

Thousands of these kids were slaughtered on the front lines, and some stories of how they were employed are truly sickening…civilized countries like Stalin’s USSR used dogs for the kinds of suicide missions in which the Basij specialized.

Seems that the sentiment among those families, who sent their hundreds of thousands of children into battle, is that the Basij are a quasi-religious patriotic nationalist front that is incorruptible. For many Iranians, accepting that Basij are evil would mean accepting that they sent their own adolescent children to die in a meaningless act. That is why the Basij are so powerful and untouchable in modern Iran.

Ahmadenijad publicly acknowledges that he was a military intelligence officer during their war with Iraq, and it is widely believed that he was a commander and trainer of Basij forces. He has been entitled to massive Basij uprisings every time people speak out against him. Through this mechanism, Ahmadenijad is able to subordinate atrocities such as we are seeing today without using official Iranian military or police forces.

“What is important is the unique way in which appeals to support for Israel co-opt liberals and the left into a right-wing foreign policy; the unique position of the Israel lobby; the unique power of being able to charge critics with anti-Semitism, which has an almost talismanic power in the American liberal psyche”

Exactly!! I would add it is the manipulations of the “liberal” media that have easily swayed our very minimal already “liberals”, (the New Yorker comes to mind)

Alright, it should have been pedantry not pedantics.
You REALLy got me, oh dumb me. Are you glad.?
By the way, I am not writing here to show pedantry. Just a parting joke.!
**************************************

Hey! You get some bonus points for cracking jokes!

“I didn’t come here to be liked!”—Maj. Frank Burns
“you came to the right place.”—Cpl. Radar O’Reilly.

Me? truedigger? With a foul mouth? Who me? Hahahaha. Surely you jest. Me thinks the extreme left edge just moved to something that is imagined to be a center. Center of what? Extreme leftist beliefs. Howling constantly about how rotten America is. Blaming Jews and Israel for everything that seems pernicious.

You know what? Most want the common folks to share in the fruit of their labor and treated fairly and honorably by big money/business. We are asking for living wage jobs, no exporting of jobs, free healthcare for everyone, secure retirement, protecting the environment and good education and housing etc etc. I definitely want those too and I campaign for them and contribute to candidates who support them (Do you?)! But you are so full of yourself you cannot see beyond the end of your radically left turned nose. But we are here poking poison darts at each other? Why? because you cannot stand a middle of the roader. I don’t give a flying fig about zionism, and I cannot say I love Israel. I have plenty of criticism of the way they treat the Palestinians. But…I have plenty of criticism of the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab empire as well! Do I care whether you agree with me or not? NO!

Aw, ITW, I have such cute pedantics! But I don’t mess with married men! I’m a coward before their debble wives! Dey gots dem nails and I like my eyes. But that doesn’t stop me from appreciating from afar!

You accuse me and many of the posters here of being radicals and extremists, thus exposing your ignorance. I suspect, you don’t know what radical or extremist really means.
Most of the blogger in this thread are REAL centrist or left of center.
Most want the common folks to share in the fruit of their labor and treated fairly and honorably by big money/business. We are asking for living wage jobs, no off-shoring of jobs, free healthcare for everyone, secure retirement, protecting the environment and good education and housing etc etc.
We want an honest government that is representing the average folks and is protecting them from the exploitation and abuse of big Money/Business by enacting and enforcing real regulations.
Most want a sane, fair and humane foreign policy that make America the respected leader of the world and not its feared and hated bully.
Is that extremism and radicalism Ms. philosopher with a foul mouth.
Yes, I am old fashioned, so I dislike intensely any woman who spout obsceneties in public, as a matter of fact I feel sorry for her. She knows she lacks substance so she compensates by spouting obsceneties.

As usual you are wrong—about just about everything. Shenon is right: I LIKED the term “The Contingent” to describe conveniently the absurd views and attacks by FT, EH, Robert, PH, et al, launched at me, Shenon, Sepharad, Howard, TheBeerDoctor, and now, Fisk, Hedges and Pfaff. Shenon coined the phrase—I just spread “the word”.

Of “The Contingent”, you clearly bring up the rear for semi-intelligent posts. None can match Shingo, but most do have their moments (albeit rare).
Here’s a fine example of your dumbness:

“Well, well, well.!! SHYNONYMOUS is back with her showy-off pedantics”

(Hey, Shenon—will you let me watch you showy off your pedantics? No..better not. I’m a a happily married man and not prone to Republican Mark Sanford hypocrisy)

I didn’t realize EH had a sense of humor—but the Mark Sanford fiasco changed my thinking on THAT (at least on THAT we had a good laugh together).

I keep thinking about Barbarism, and how it’s bitterest opponent is the COC—the Church of Cosmetology, founded by L. Ron Maybeline….

You accuse me, many of the posters here of being radicals and extremists, thus
exposing you ignorance. I suspect, you don’t know
what radical or extremist really means.
Most of the blogger in this thread are REAL centrist
or left of center.
Most want the common folks to share in the fruit of their labor and treated fairly and honorably by big money/business. We are asking for living wage jobs,
no exporting of jobs, free healthcare for everyone,
secure retirement, protecting the environment and good education and housing etc etc.
Most want sane and humane foreign policy that make
America the respected leader of the world and not its feared and hated bully.
Is that extremism and radicalism Ms. philosopher with
a foul mouth.
Yes, I am old fashioned, so I dislike intensely

Why truedigger3 did you know what while there is not a philosophy of needlework there is a group that does a needlework of philosophy? It is the practice of stitching together all the asshole left-wing political theories that somehow get expressed in public Internet forums to show how absurd they are. Oh, yeah, the same group stitches together the asshole right-wing political theories as well. They make what are called bullshit quilts out of the pieces. Would you like to order one? They are cheap shots.

KDelphi, you have made some good points and I visited the Democratic Underground link. Neologisms are good, they stretch the language. Often even slang expressions become part of the common vocabulary. Yes, it stands to reason that if someone keeps replying to a term it might mean something to them. Not sure how that insight progresses the forum conflicts that have arisen. Perhaps you meant “referring to a term?” However, if it is a neologism it could be idiosyncratic to the user and perhaps even calculated to obscure any real meaning, thus giving empty and useless remarks. It is sort of akin to name-calling. I am an inordinately tolerant person. I walk a middle path because no one, NO ONE, has the truth. I hate, yes H A T E, extremism in any form, except for extremely hating extremism. Insane extremisms such as racism, bigotry, sexism damages the world. Now I usually try to avoid name-calling or tearing down someone’s virtues or pointing out a lack thereof. However once it is leveled at me, I respond. Mea culpa. It doesn’t matter how ejumacated a person is tolerance only goes so far.

nefesh fairly asked for definitions. Ed Harges reacted quite asinine and ask me for a whole slew of definitions out of his anger that anyone would defend America, etc. I have a right to do that without being attacked for it, however snidely it is done. That kind of attack is typical of what goes on in totalitarian governments in the world today. I provided them at once thinking how really stupid Harges made himself look! Perhaps not to the somnambulistics on the forum (I will not define that word. Earlier I provided a dictionary link for those who prefer to look up their own ignornaces), or those with weak minds who take glee when a Contingent tries to abrade my character.

truedigger3—Youre right, and, we have interferred in Venezuelan (and all Latin American countries that we can) elections, many times.

“In Venezuela, more than once, the reactionary and oligarchic counter-revolution, with the support of imperialism, has attempted to create a situation of chaos in the streets with the excuse of an alleged “electoral fraud” in order to de-legitimise the election victories of the revolution (during the recall referendum, in the 2006 presidential elections, during the constitutional reform referendum in 2007, etc).”

nefesh—youre right about not disagreeing with what you dont understand—but you dont seem to understand that.

She, I have defined some of these terms on here, over and over and the only response I ever get is “well, thats wrong”. I dont see the point in doing it again.

I dont think that they want a real “definition” do you? I think that they are being snide and know fully well what people mean by it when they use it.

It is more of a ‘statement” they are making ie ‘that doesnt make any sense”. Not really asking a question. You can agree or disagree, but, if people keep replying to a term, it must meant something to them. Perhaps nefesh should keep reading and figure out what it means.

You are a broken record truedigger3. Ahs is a dum blonde broad, but ahs smahter than youse. You keep talking about ‘current events’ but never give one. Blah blah blah As a matter of fact I coined the name The Contingent back on February 23 Rules of War TD forum and continued to use it until not only ITW but a few others who do agree with me started to use it as well! It was and is a perfect description. Even you with your myopic mind is able to see that. Yes I have biased views. Biased to counteract your extreme Left-wing hate-filled hostile radical anti-Semitic posture that is as equally repugnant as the extreme radical Islamophobic Right wing . It is your choice to exist in such swill. Ahs knows you Contingents hate it and hate me. Too bad, hate is like a poison and eventually your mind will go completely bye bye. It is just a matter of time.

Each word in that dumb post, proves over and over , your utter lack of commonsense, and any basic real knowledge and understanding of current events, both domestic and foreign, and any knowledge of history.
How did it happen, that an ignoramus like you became a college teacher??!!
Are you teaching the philosophy of needle work?.
You imitate ITW and call us contingent. O.K. most of the contingent doesn’t agree with your ignorant biased views.
You better off posting in AIPAC site, you will have a lot of agreeing company out there, and probably as a reward for your professed love for Israel, you might get a grant or a promotion to teach the logic of quilting.

And, are you talking about the US here? “dictatorship whose leaders rig elections and beat down clear popular demands for a true election count or repeat of the election itself”.

By the way, Muslims are way more civilized in their everyday lives than not. Muslim law even forbids usury, for which western religions are just fine with. You can’t even say the punishments are harsher if you look at our prisons.

I don’t recall the cops tasering people in Iran, or invading someone else’s country and building settlements, or using white phosphorus on other people’s children, or stealing taxpayer money on a grand scale either for that matter.

Israel is the real degenerate here, and its enabler the US (and the american taxpayer). There’s no getting around that no matter how much you smear, which is what this article is.

”... think back to the Republican National Convention in Minnesota and the repression of expression demonstrated there. See, we still are influential.”

Right on, RWM! And if this is how our government represses demonstrators now, imagine how the US government would behave if it were in Iran’s situation: they have thousands of demonstrators in many cites, burning cars and screaming for the death of the country’s head of government; they have a suicide bombing at a house of worship; and there are two major foreign powers, much stronger militarily and economically than their own country, loudly cheering for the demonstrators, and demanding “regime change”, by which they mean the fall of the entire government, very possibly resulting in anarchy. And furthermore, those two powerful foreign nations have a long and recent history of openly seeking to destabilize the Iranian government and/or bomb the place, funding and giving safe haven to terrorist groups that seek that government’s overthrow (MEK, for example). Americans and Israelis are so blinded by their self-righteous exceptionalism that they are totally unable to perform the most basic task of ethical reasoning: to put oneself in another’s place.

Our government, with its outrageously bloated military strength and largest economy in the world, along with being the self-styled definitive home of democratic, liberal values, has nevertheless frequently and recently behaved like a besieged, paranoid, fragile little chihuahua, reacting with beastly, fear-crazed viciousness toward peaceful protesters. Furthermore, our media barely cover public demonstrations here at all.

Hey truedigger3, I see you have your bash-Shenonymous bludgeon out, again, ahem! How stale you are. It must be painful to realize you fall short in the discriminating thinking department. You cannot hide it with intimidating verbal thuggery. In effect you are about as menacing as a soggy cotton ball. You just don’t have the intellect to demonstrate you have an intellect. I didn’t even have to say it, it is obvious to all with every post you make. But it gives me great pleasure to say it. You and the others are making me a celebrity! If you were smart (and here I instruct you), you would crawl back into the hole out of which you sneak from time to time and stay there.

And where, oh “famous TD forum idiot” have you demonstrated you have common sense. You barely show you have sense at all. Get a grip. Here is another bit of advice from the dazzling brainy show-off-full-of-herself Shenonymous: Turn your venom towards something constructive with your own life, you might make something worthwhile out of it. You are just a petty member of the group that besides me, loves to bash the United States while hypocritically enjoying all the freedoms and opportunities it offers, bashing and the self-hating Jews that love to bash Israel, the smallest country on the planet that can whip the shit out of everybody. It must be really galling. You sort of have a status like the Palestinians have within the Arab/Irani empire. By the way, I have no extra love of Israel, as I noted innumerable times, but I do tend to side with the lone dog even if that lone dog is really a powerhouse. I really hate gang banging which you and your Contingent cronies practice with gusto. Just take a look at a map of the Middle East and see how small Israel is compared to the Arab/Irani Empire.

I suggest you ignore any talk of philosophy and logic since you don’t have the skills to understand either. It is waaayyy toooo deeeep for you, waaayyy over your head. Everybody would be knocked out if you said anything intelligent.

It is visibly and unmistakenly evident that Iran is in shreds. And what is most splendid is that they did it all by themselves contrary to the accusations of the extreme left and the embarrassed Iranian government that the US and other western countries had anything to do with it. It is clear the west did have something to do with it, and that is that they provide the model of freedom the general Iranian public has not had in any substantial way for four decades since the heavy-fisted oppressive extreme Islamists took over the country and actually never really had from the get go a political ideology that has its base in a ruthless religion.

Rigged elections, oh my! Repressed demonstrations and protests, oh my, my! Seems like someone is learning the American Democratic system, eh? Obviously not to the degree that the Iranian government has violently beat down demonstrations, but think back to the Republican National Convention in Minnesota and the repression of expression demonstrated there. See, we still are influential.

Maybe after Iran! They attack Chavez in the MSM all the time.
First they will try to install “friendly” regimes, e.g. compliant regimes from the inside, and if that fail, then come the naked invasion. That is my guessing, although predicting the furture is very difficult.
Oil is part of the bigger picture which is that every country should open up its markets and resources for the power-that-be.!!

Well, well, well.!! SHYNONYMOUS is back with her showy-off pedantics and her ardent zionism and love for Israel.
About the most simplest of subjects she likes to show off with a lengthy lectures of abstract logic and philosophy, but meanwhile displays a total lack of commonsense and an obvious ignorance of current events and history.

And has the last ten years revealed anything about the US?
How we torture, how we consider slain iraqi babies as collateral damage. How we completely turn our heads away from so as not to have to acknowledge the millions we have left without homes, In refugee camps, without blanket, medicine and food?
Where do you pious morons come off finding fault with Iran?

I can’t believe this no-news piece even merited a space on the forum.
Does anyone care that there were some riots in Iran (just like in the US) and some people got injured and some got killed. In the US we would call them “collateral damage”.
Does anyone remember the photos of the americans who had been hit with rubber bullets just for gathering in a wrong place. Does anyone know anyone who has been tased and terrorized or killed from it? Do you recall the horrible photos of the beatings and the killing that went on in the aftermath of Katrina. Why are we so outraged over what Iran is doing?

You’r right of course, Ed, that zionism is a reactioary influence, hijacking progressives to support violence and reprssion and dragging the Dem party to the right the way Christian fundamnetalism drags the Gops to the right.

But it is important to distinguish what the old Soviets called Who-Whom, who is leading whom and who is being led. I think in the crucial power relations it is the neolibcons leading the Zionists. the ruling class identify with their money interests before their national-religion interests. Indeed, more than the intersts of the American power system.

This has policy implications. For example, if this is true, than US progressives should attack the US ruling class more than the Zionists, because they have the power to implement a two state solution and the Zionists don’t. If Obaama said to that filthy Israeli regime, two-states NOW, the only alternative to complying would be total isolation. But Obama doesn’t and won’t say it because it wants Israel as its military in the Mideast, and if it were at peace, it wouldn’t be on the US leash.

If on the other hand, you think it is the Zionist tail wagging the US dog, than the best apprach is attacking Zionism, not neolibcons. Always assuming of course that you are going to attack both, but it is a question of where the emphasis should be. Even though, as you said before, Zionism does more harm to the American people and the people of the world than then even their brutality to the Palestinian people.

To free the Palestinian people from Israeli brutality, the most effective thing the American people can do is to attack the American power structure. Because they are holding the leash of the Israli dog.

Never used the word oil. NSC 68 doesn’t mentioned the word oil either.

US hegemony is about control. Oil is scarce therefore control access is what imperialism is about.

But US imperialism is primarily about controlling access to the world’s resources. Most of that oil is in the Middle East and Canada provides some variation of quality through it’s own process of eco-destruction.

To Max and FT: it’s not a question of whether it’s mostly about oil or mostly about Zionism. What is important is the unique way in which appeals to support for Israel co-opt liberals and the left into a right-wing foreign policy; the unique position of the Israel lobby; the unique power of being able to charge critics with anti-Semitism, which has an almost talismanic power in the American liberal psyche. If we just want to grab oil, why don’t we invade Venezuela?

Yes, there is a symbiotic relationship between Zionism (a brand of Western imperialism) and US imperialism, but there is little doubt that the history on this US empire began long before Israel/zionism.

NSC 68 provides the most direct statement of US foreign policy; but that policy from 1950 is merely the culmination of many decades of forming, certainly from Woodrow Wilson through to the present. Wilson was the perfect example, University Prof/President of Princton, and then the “peace/progressive” president who became one of the biggest warmongers of all times. The lead up to WWI makes George W. Bush look like a bastion of pacifism. (Sound like someone we know today?)

The story is old; and we, Americans can’t remember what we had for breakfast…and so it goes on and on.

Ed Harges, is your sole purpose in life to try to maliciously denigrate me? Get a life. I doan know nuttin. Ahms ignrant. Who the hell cares about the distinctions you are trying to make about Islamist? What is your stake in the definition? Why are you getting so hot under the collar? You are acting like a snide sniper. It’s okay. You can belong to the group that have little character, it is your choice.

Nah, its the christians wagging america’s tail; some catholics mainly. Few baptists, too.
they were overheard plotting in the next town over from here.
ya know, those billionair guys running Fannie mae and Citigroup and Bank of America. Should put ‘em all in jail for interfering.

Max, I used to think that the Israeli tail was wagging the American dog but in analyzing these kind of incidents like the Iran election, I changed my mind. I think now that ruling class neoliberals are using Zionists in the same way they are using fundamentalist right wing loonies. That is, Jewish billiionaires like Addleson, Saban and Soros identify with money more than Israel.

I think this disinformation campaign is more about oil than Zionism, because both candidates favor nuclear development. and Muoussavi and his billionaire backer Rafsantani are for privitizing governement corporations, including oil corporations.

I thought you were smarter than apparently you are, Ed Harges. My mistake. You are acting petulant (petulant-showing or inclined to show sudden or unreasonable irritation, impatience, or ill temper; peevish or sulky.) Tch, tch, tch… But here is a site for you to check out 13 longer forms of the definition for Islamist. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:islamist&ei=IslCSoT7CIrHlAefteDvCA&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title
The last entry from translation dictionary calls it a synonym for Muslim, which is a follower of Islam. That is nice short and sweet. A candidate for KISS (Keeping it simple stupid).

ITW’s definition is better however, but I have already deferred to him. It would br redundant to do it again.

OK, now I really feel sorry for you. “Follower of Islam” defines ‘Muslim’, not ‘Islamist’. You really do not know the difference between a Muslim and an Islamist. And you have a college teaching job. Wow.

ITW, I like your definitions so much better than mine. Mine were reactively academic, way too serious, yours way wicked cool. I think I need to take lessons in humor from you. Aw, but it’s better that we have only one inimitable ITW. Inimitable-the ability to commit inimits, or not copyable.

Gosh trudigger3 are you one of the thought police? Verbal clubbing is quite unnecessary in a civilized world. Ahhh yes, I get it…this is not a civilized world. Sorry, but nefesh has made strong and effective comments. By the way, who hired him? Israel is wisely staying out of the Iranian uprising. Obviously you and a few others don’t want to listen to the common people there. Would you rather make up your own story of what is happening there? Seems to me, from all the posts here so far, there is a bias for the present Irani government. It is far from clear the Iranian dissidents will ever be appeased for the freedoms many now have died for from one of the most oppressive governments in the world. The ordinary folks have a taste for protest now. The beatings they have taken and brutality will not be forgotten. It is permanently recorded in history.

“Well the Irani government themselves admits several million votes were irregular.

This is misleading. What Kadkhodaei stated was this:

“the voter turnout of above 100% in some cities is a normal phenomenon because there is no legal limitation for people to vote for the presidential elections in another city or province to which people often travel or commute. “

He is describing what, in my country we call “special votes”. That is the votes placed by people who are traveling on polling day and vote outside of their own electorate.

The question we must ask ourselves is: what is the likelihood of about 6% of Iranians traveling on election day?

Then we must ask ourselves why the media (and Shenonymous for that matter) should play this card as a trump when it is in fact a rag.

Please don’t waste your time and energy arguing and trying to reason with that “nefesh”.
He is a hired troll, whose only mission is to through monkey wrenches in any discussion that touches the M.E and involves and might involve Israel.
His only objective is to antagonize you and irritate you and in the mean time keep lying and defending Israel. Don’t fall for it.

people’s movement: demonstrations in the streets by people you agree with. Not to be confused with phony demonstrations instigated by a) the US and Israel or b) Supporters of the current dictatorial government.

I would agree that another mask has fallen off and Mr. William Pfaff’s true face is now before us, for this, my dear posters, is blatant propaganda, indeed. And then, of course, there are those who would post comments just to throw off the debate. Shills?

Point by point.

1) Iran did not make itself Mr. Pfaff, the US and its allies made Iran by starving (via ten years of sanctions) and then brutally destroying its chief nemesis, Iraq. Ever heard of a self-inflicted power vacuum?

2) ‘Traditional Muslim Monarchies (TMM)?’ Wow! So Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Morocco are TMM’s and not brutal, anti-democratic, totalitarian regimes, who would rather commit hari-kari than submit to anything at all resembling ‘Iranian’ elections? Who is William Pfaff?

3) Discredited elections. Are they, perhaps, discredited Mr. Pfaff because the US has allocated $400 million to ‘destabilize’ Iran, with the help of Britain and Israel? Kind of like what happened in 1953 do you think? I think, you were referring to the 2000 and 2004 elections in the good old US, where there were bundles of hard evidence with regard to a ‘discredited election.’ That’s it!

4) Majority of Iranians. And you would know that via what piece of hard evidence? The truth on the ground Mr. Pfaff is that the majority (read poor, quazi-economically disenfranchised) are quite loyal to President Ahmadinejad or didn’t you know that? Ever read a poll or history for that matter. I believe, that in the previous election Mr. Ahmadinejad also received over 60 percent of the vote, and incumbents are generally hard to displace.

5) The Shah. But NO mention whatsoever of his brutality and how he was ‘imposed’ upon the Iranians by the Good old US and Britain. This I find particularly telling. Besides, it’s Deja vu all over again. Or don’t you think so?

This was a troubling article. It is clear to say that the progressive web-sphere has been penetrated, bought-off, what have you. Better to know now, however, than later.

cosmic-immeasurably extended in time and space; vast, at an ideological level. (ideological-speculative from a system of beliefs, that guides individuals, social movements, institutions, etc.) [etc., means et cetera, Latin for and others, and so forth].

Ordinary people-usually boring, but people not in governments, or other large agencies, those considered the ‘general’ public, or the commonfolks. The masses often called mindless, others have called them plebeians (Romans), proletariat (Communists), hoi polloi (Ancient Greek), the herd, the peons, the working class, is that enough? Do you need the word ‘general’ defined as well?

But if you want to keep demonstrating your stupidity, keep asking stupid questions on Truthdig.

stupidity-the poor ability to understand or to profit (learn) from experience; derived from stupid - lacking or marked by lack of intellectual acuity. Acuity-sharpness of vision, mind, quick and penetrating intelligence. Also, a person who is not very bright.

The color of the world is Shades of Gray, a metaphor meaning as a couple have already perceptively noted, always in flux it is not black and white! neither extreme left nor right. Only pockets of left and right extremists are fomenting the cosmic battles. Ordinary people just want to get on with living.

What if we are looking in a mirror so we can see our own countenance when calling other governments brutal dictatorial? Brutality by any group or individual is immoral. Because the other is identified does not mean there is no culpability at home! And to pretend that is what was meant is prevarication to beef up puny partisanship. The difference between the Middle Eastern respect for their citizens in not in the least comparable to the United States. Americans have marches on Washington rather regularly. As a matter of fact the Gays and Lesbians are already advertising their October March. So don’t give us the sob story of atrocity in our own country. Everybody knows there have been administrations more brutal than others here. I don’t deny it! That does not preclude a criticism of barbarism when it is seen elsewhere!

Without solid proof of “rigged” voter count in Iran,blah blah blah…Oh really? Well the Irani government themselves admits several million votes were irregular. But it isn’t enough to overturn the outcome. Moussavi would not necessarily bring much change to the Iran – American relationship. He became the recruited facade for the burgeoning movement that had been fermenting for a long time among the ordinary people. The people want change! They are disenchanted by Islamist oppression. They speak for themselves. Movements are more successful if there is a focal point leader, titular or nominal or popularly elected. But former ruling clerics are now supporting the people’s movement.

Iran discredits itself and does not need a journalist to do it for them. They are incomparable at doing it themselves. The world is watching and becoming well advised by the ordinary Irani people.

Keeping statements vague is a strategy. When words are kept obscure weak arguments pretend to be more than they are. Asking for definitions is a perfectly justifiable request to be sure the language used is clearly understood. Otherwise hot air prevails called partisan blather. nefesh appropriately asks for ambiguity to be removed. It is stupid to ask why terms need clarified. It is self-defining. And it reduces bogus arguments and dim conclusions.

Your question is pertinent, but not so much for this thread, but because this Nefash is using the Zionist tactics of bait and switch. It’s worked grotesquely and murderously, but he/she finds it works here as long as we keep looking for a “good faith” discussion; when Zionists and nefash are all about “bad faith”.